Fuck Syria. If those assholes wanna fight and kill each other every fucking day then GO AHEAD!! Fuck 'em, their gov't, the opposition, adults, kids, pets, bugs, just let it rot... And that goes for ALL of those shitbag Muslim/Arab countries.

_________________Make your checks payable to QUENTIN ROBERT DeNAMELAND, Greatest Living Philostopher Known to Mankind.

Yea I think we have zero foreign policy, now we telegraph what a response is lets just keep an eye in the sky on these camel jockeys, Saddam did have wmd's he used them on the curds, bu again bush played his hand and iraq moved them, looks like to syria as some said at the time. What a waste we use up our military in iraq and china gets the oil!, not cheney and we want this admin to run the health care in the us? Looks like we have an overabundance of low information voters.

_________________A government Bureau is the closest thing to eternal life on earth that you will ever see

I agree with all of you (except for the ball peen hammer part). I'm tired of foreign adventures. I'm tired of dead American soldiers who died for nothing. How about spending some of that money here at home before China quits funding our bankruptcy?

Anyone that voted for that shitdick Obama needs to be beaten in the fucking face with a ball peen hammer.

I'm not an Obama cheerleader but McCain/Palin!? We would have invaded Iran, Egypt & Syria already. Not to mention Georgia. McCain loves intervention/war. And then the Wall Streeter the 2nd go round? We are fucked...

Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 12:41 pmPosts: 14038Location: From some place in this area...

jaypfunk wrote:

Milton Bradley wrote:

Some other countries should be given a chance to field this one.

no. everyone should butt out and let them fucking behave like savage cunts if they want. FUCK 'EM!!

Whoever we areWherever we're fromWe shoulda noticed by nowOur behavior is dumbAnd if our chancesExpect to improveIt's gonna take a lot moreThan tryin' to removeThe other raceOr the other whateverFrom the faceOf the planet altogether

They call it THE EARTHWhich is a dumb kinda nameBut they named it right'Cause we behave the same . . .We are dumb all overDumb all over,Yes we areDumb all over,Near 'n farDumb all over,Black 'n whitePeople, we is not wrapped tight

Nurds on the leftNurds on the rightReligious fanaticsOn the air every nightSayin' the BibleTells the story'N makes the detailsSound real gory'Bout what to doIf the geeks over thereDon't believe in the bookYou got over here

You can't run a raceWithout no feet'N pretty soonThere won't be no streetFor dummies to jog onOr doggies to dog onReligious fanaticsCan make it be all gone(It won't blow up'N disappearIt'll just look uglyFor a thousand years . . . )

You can't run a countryBy a book of religionNot by a heapOr a lump or a smidgeonOf foolish rulesOf ancient dateDesigned to makeYou all feel greatWhile you fold, spindleAnd mutilateThose unbelieversFrom a neighboring state

TO ARMS! TO ARMS!Hooray! That's greatTwo legs ain't badUnless there's a crateThey ship the partsTo mama inFor souvenirs: two ears (Get Down!)Not his, not hers (but what the hey?)The Good Book says:"It gotta be that way!"But their book says:"REVENGE THE CRUSADES . . .With whips 'n chains'N hand grenades . . . "TWO ARMS? TWO ARMS?Have another and anotherOur God says:"There ain't no other!"Our God says"It's all okay!"Our God says"This is the way!"

It says in the book:"Burn 'n destroy . . .Repent, 'n redeem'N revenge, 'n deploy'N rumble thee forthTo the land of the unbelieving scum on the other side'Cause they don't go for what's in the book'N that makes 'em BADSo verily we must choppeth them upAnd stompeth them downOr rent a nice French bombTo poof them out of existanceWhile leaving their real estate just where we need itTo use againFor temples in which to praiseOUR GOD("Cause he can really GO HAWAIIAN!")

And when his humble TV servantWith a brown suit,Glasses,Maybe a blonde wife who takes phone callsTells us it's okay to do this stuffThen we gotta do it,'Cause if we don't do it,We ain't gwine up to hebbin!Ain't that right?It's right.I mean, seriously,This television evangelist stuff isDANGEROUS BUSINESS.Don't let 'em get ya.Anyway, listen.We can't really be dumbIf we're just following God's OrdersAfter all He wrote this book hereAn' in the book it says:"He made us all to be just like Him," so . . .If we're dumb . . .Then God is dumb . . .(An' maybe even a little ugly on the side)

DUMB ALL OVERA LITTLE UGLY ON THE SIDEDUMB ALL OVERA LITTLE UGLY ON THE SIDE

_________________The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true Art and Science. - Albert Einstein

US Attack on Syria Would Circumvent Constitution, Intl LawWar drums grow louder as familiar tactics used to garner support for military action that only 9 percent of Americans support

- Jon Queally, staff writer

As a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll shows, support for further U.S. military involvement in Syria—whether called by its real name, "war," or the government's preferred euphemism, "intervention"—stands at a mere 9 percent.

Well aware of its own citizens' reluctance to embark on yet another military misadventure in the Middle East region after more than a decade of wars, it appears that the Obama administration, led by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Monday is eager to try its hand at shifting public opinion by employing what war critics see as familiar arguments and lofty rhetoric.

But as the Independent's Patrick Cockburn writes, "only a peace conference, not air strikes, can stop further bloodshed."

Claiming the U.S. now has "evidence" that the alleged chemical attack in Syria last week was perpetrated by the forces of President Bashar al-Assad, Kerry claimed the high ground for the "consequences" which according to many sources will come in the form of cruise missiles aimed at targets in the country's densely-populated capital of Damascus.

"There is a reason why no matter what you believe about Syria, all peoples and all nations who believe in the cause of our common humanity must stand up to assure that there is accountability for the use of chemical weapons so that it never happens again," Kerry said, seeming to infer that those who favor "common humanity" should now come to support U.S. airstrikes on the country.

But Phyllis Bennis, from the Institute of Policy Studies in Washington, together with David Wildman of Human Rights & Racial Justice for the Global Ministries of the United Methodist Church reject that suggestion, saying that cruise missiles will make the important work of diplomacy an impossibility. "What’s needed now," Bennis and Wildman write, "is tough diplomacy, not politically-motivated military strikes that will make a horrific war even worse."

"Let’s be clear," they continued. "Any US military attack, cruise missiles or anything else, will not be to protect civilians—it will mean taking sides once again in a bloody, complicated civil war.

In addition, as media outlets parrot administration claims about intelligence with little adversarial questioning from the Washington press corps, one question receiving at least some scrutiny amid the drum beat of war is whether or not Obama will seek to obtain either Congressional approval or a UN mandate for missile attacks or airstrikes against Syrian forces.

As McClatchy reports, however:

The Obama administration [...] has already shown a willingness to dance around legal restraints.

In March 2011, for instance, U.S. ships and warplanes began participating in an international air assault on Libya. The U.S. contribution to the six-month-long campaign included cruise missiles, drone strikes, bombers, fighters and more. Nonetheless, the State Department’s top legal adviser insisted the actions didn’t amount to “hostilities,” a legally significant term.

Using logic that could recur with Syria, then-legal adviser Harold Koh told a skeptical Senate Foreign Relations Committee in June 2011 that the “limited exposure for U.S. troops, limited risk of serious escalation and . . . limited military means” meant the Libyan campaign didn’t amount to hostile action. As a result, Obama asserted that he didn’t have to comply with the War Powers Resolution’s requirement that U.S. troops be withdrawn within 60 days of the start of hostilities unless Congress authorizes action.But as foreign policy expert Robert Naiman wrote on the pages of Common Dreams Monday, these legal arguments are an affront to the Constitution and set in place a dangerous precedent. "There must be no U.S. military action in Syria without Congressional debate and authorization," Naiman wrote.

"If Congress doesn't count, then the American people don't count," Naiman continued, arguing that there's no emergency in Syria and that even if there was, Congress can simply be called into session. "It's no accident that the permanent war party wants the President to go around Congress when the majority of Americans are strongly opposed to a new war. If Congress and the American people can be evaded in this case, it's a body blow to the principle that U.S. foreign policy should be subordinate to democracy and the rule of law."

As Mary Ellen O’Connell, a professor of international law at the University of Notre Dame, told McClatchy, “The president and his close advisers talk a lot about international law, so I don’t see how the president can ignore that now without seeming to be hypocritical.”

She pointed out that in the international arena, only two circumstances generally permit war making: either a claim of national self-defense or an authorization given by the U.N. Security Council.

Self-defense doesn’t apply in the Syrian case, O’Connell said, because “the use of chemical weapons within Syria is not an armed attack on the United States.” And as has been widely acknowledged, the UN Security Council is likely a dead end for the U.S. and its European allies eager to strike Syria because Russia will likely veto any resolution calling for direct military action.

Of course, just gaining approval or sanction for military action does not necessarily justify what peace advocates would still consider a misguided approach to bringing an ultimate end to the violence in Syria.

As The Nation's Bob Dreyfuss argued Monday, even if the Assad regime is proven to have used chemical weapons on its own people—a terrible and horrific crime—it does not follow that US or NATO airstrikes will rectify the problem or help save lives in the long-term.

The proper response by the United States," said Dreyfuss, "is an all-out effort to achieve a ceasefire in the Syrian civil war. It’s late in the game but it can be done."

According to polling, nearly 91 percent of Americans would likely support that.

I say in the words of obama and biden, the us has to hit the reset button and not act like a cowboy and attack a country without congressional approval which would be an impeachable offense, Bush went to congress, so with libya and now syria, we see just what we have for a pres.

_________________A government Bureau is the closest thing to eternal life on earth that you will ever see

Anyone that voted for that shitdick Obama needs to be beaten in the fucking face with a ball peen hammer.

I'm not an Obama cheerleader but McCain/Palin!? We would have invaded Iran, Egypt & Syria already. Not to mention Georgia. McCain loves intervention/war. And then the Wall Streeter the 2nd go round? We are fucked...

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum